Interesting NAS CC says plane is not associated with CC or Kingsville bases, and they have no idea where the plane came from or what it was doing there. Growing up I never saw military planes using the commercial airport for training, there were (and still are) numerous military training fields in addition to NAS CC & Kingsville in South Texas.

Last edited by Nyogtha; 11/07/1706:49 PM.

"No matter how paranoid you are you're not paranoid enough. Tell the truth. Reach as many people as you can with it. That's your weapon." - Susanne Modeski, aka "Holly" to The Lone Gunmen

The statement was released by the Chief of Naval Air Training Public Affairs Officer. They didn't know where the plane came from because it wasn't a training aircraft. It was a fleet aircraft. Generally we don't train at training command bases because the dissimilar platforms don't play well in the pattern together, and we prefer to avoid student aviators. That leaves commercial airports and Air Force bases.

I'm unable to comment due to an ongoing investigation. However if any further information is released I'll comment and post references here.

I can say that overall the CFM56 has not been as reliable as promised in the service we see. I don't think CFM ever envisioned their engines being operated at 200-2000 feet over salt water for hours and hours on end.

The statement was released by the Chief of Naval Air Training Public Affairs Officer. They didn't know where the plane came from because it wasn't a training aircraft. It was a fleet aircraft. Generally we don't train at training command bases because the dissimilar platforms don't play well in the pattern together, and we prefer to avoid student aviators. That leaves commercial airports and Air Force bases.

In my civilian ignorace I'm surprised a USN aircraft was operating in the area of active NAS with no knowledge of the NAS, and real surprise the commercial airport was used instead of the runway at a NAS when an emergency, landing was made.

Was this aircraft invisible to NAS radar much less other internal communication?

Weird the Fleet operation play better with patterns at a commercial airport than at a NAS? Never would have figured. Navy doesn't play well with Navy.

Nearest USAF bases I can think of are here in San Antonio. Not far to avoid using a commercial airport.

Last edited by Nyogtha; 11/07/1707:57 PM.

"No matter how paranoid you are you're not paranoid enough. Tell the truth. Reach as many people as you can with it. That's your weapon." - Susanne Modeski, aka "Holly" to The Lone Gunmen

Maybe in your direct involvement you can mention the questionable wisdom of operating military training operations using a commercial airport in close proximity to a major commercial port heavily skewed to petroleum and petrochemicals with large petroleum refineries, a petrochemicals plant, and a NGL fractionation facility right in the area vs. a nearby NAS on open water away not only ftom these facilities but also ftom the majority of the population center.

From a fundamental perspecive of risk awareness and risk management, it makes little sense vs. addressing internal issues to make Navy play well with Navy for training.

A short examination of a map of the area will show what I'm speaking of.

"No matter how paranoid you are you're not paranoid enough. Tell the truth. Reach as many people as you can with it. That's your weapon." - Susanne Modeski, aka "Holly" to The Lone Gunmen

Approaches not available at military fields, traffic volume, like size and type aircraft.

It's not a matter of Navy not playing well with Navy. It's an issue of small turbo prop aircraft that fly the pattern 30-50 KTS SLOWER than the P-8, not to mention the desire to stay away from large groups of training aircraft.

I'm sure NAS controllers had the plane on their radar, but if they never switched from approach controllers to tower the NAS wouldn't have had any interaction with the P-8.

As for the statement, information was available for the affected plane, but may not have been available to the PAO at the time of the release. A flight plan was on file as we fly IFR to the max extent possible in accordance with the OPNAV 3710 instruction. Such a flight plan would've included where the plane originated from. The tail letters indicate the squadron who owns the plane as does the BUNO. Additionally it's not a mystery where a P-8 came from as there's only a few places where they're based.

As for why the emergency landing was at a civilian field as opposed to the NAS, it was the closet suitable runway during the emergency. In a land as soon as possible situation this was the obvious choice. No need (or desire) to leave a suitable strip of concrete to divert to a military field with a land as soon as possible malfunction.

Maybe in your direct involvement you can mention the questionable wisdom of operating military training operations using a commercial airport in close proximity to a major commercial port heavily skewed to petroleum and petrochemicals with large petroleum refineries, a petrochemicals plant, and a NGL fractionation facility right in the area vs. a nearby NAS on open water away not only ftom these facilities but also ftom the majority of the population center.

From a fundamental perspecive of risk awareness and risk management, it makes little sense vs. addressing internal issues to make Navy play well with Navy for training.

A short examination of a map of the area will show what I'm speaking of.

By that logic no 737 aircraft or any other aircraft should operate at Corpus international. I'm not really sure what I can explain that I already haven't explained. Operating a civilian based aircraft conducting an approach to an airport that terminates in a touch and go and on the the next airfield is hardly high risk training. By no stretch of the imagination did their operations at a commercial airport subject anyone to any undue risk.

I disagree with your logic as the 737's operating out of CC airport are not on training flights. Simple as that.

Why was NAS CC established as far away as possible from the Port of CC after all?

Seems like bureaucracy not looking at alternatives.

Clearly this won't merit further mention by you from the inside. Fair enough.

FWIW more jet aircraft train at Kingsville.

First off I didn't say the aircraft involved in the incident was on a training mission. So please don't make correlations where I didn't state there were any. I stated that it is routine to shoot practice approaches to commercial and military fields for training. Perhaps training is the wrong word, as it's really pilot proficiency, no different than any commercial pilot gets, there are monthly requirements in place to ensure proficiency is maintained. A pilot proficiency flight is flown no different than any standard commercial flight, in a comparable platform.

I'm well aware more jet aircraft operate at Kingsville, again, dissimilar platforms, those small jet trainer aircraft fly significantly faster in the pattern than the P-8 which complicates operations unnecessarily for both platforms when other options are available. Furthermore the wake turbulence created by the much larger and heavier P-8 is a hazard to their aircraft as well as the turbo prop aircraft at Corpus NAS. The other various outlying military fields are unsuitable in both length and width to accommodate the P-8 and the runway is of insufficient strength for the weight of the P-8.

It's not bureaucratic anything. It's solid and well thought out risk management not having grossly dissimilar platforms operating in close proximity to each other. Students stick to training bases for the most part, and we stay away.

A qualified pilot shooting an approach to a suitable field is no different from a risk standpoint than a likewise qualified commercial pilot shooting the same approach to the same field.

If you're so concerned about risk you should probably protest any and all GA flying near any populated area or industrial complex, the risks of mechanical failure or procedural noncompliance is significantly higher there than in a brand new commercial jet aircraft performing a routine approach to an airport.